Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 687

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Calculating unbiased tree-ring indices for the study of climatic and environmental change

Cook, Edward R., Peters, Kenneth·1997·The Holocene

Abstract

In dendroclimatology, tree-ring indices are traditionally calculated as part of the tree-ring chronology development process. This is accomplished by fitting a growth curve to the ring-width series and using it as a series of expectations for more or less well specified null conditions (uniform climate perhaps) of annual radial growth. The ratio of the actual ring widths to these expectations produces a set of dimensionless indices that can be averaged arithmetically with cross-dated indices from other trees into a mean chronology suitable for studies of climatic and environmental change. We show that tree-ring indices calculated in this manner can be systematically biased. The shape of this bias is defined by the reciprocal of the growth curve used to calculate the indices, and its magnitude depends on the proximity of the growth curve to the time axis and its intercept. The underlying cause, however, is lack of fit. To avoid this bias, residuals from the growth curve, rather than ratios, can be computed. If this is done, in conjunction with appropriate transformations to stabilize the variance, the resulting tree-ring chronology will not be biased in the way that ratios can be. This bias problem is demonstrated in an annual tree-ring chronology of bristlecone pine from Campito Mountain, which has been used previously in global change studies. We show that persistent growth increase since AD 1900 in that series is over-estimated by 23.6% on average when ratios are used instead of residuals, depending on how the ring widths are transformed. Such bias in ratios is not always serious, as it depends on the joint behaviour of the growth curve and data, particularly near the ends of the data interval. Consequently, ratios can still be used safely in many situations. However, to avoid the possibility of ratio bias problems, we recommend that variance-stabilized residuals be used.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/095968369700700314

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Cited by

See all 687

Metadata

Authors
Cook, E. R., & Peters, K.
Venue
The Holocene
Published
1997-09
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
361-370
ISSN
  • 0959-6836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-0911
OpenAlex
W2115476971
Cited by
687
References
14
FWCI
1.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Calculating unbiased tree-ring indices for the study of climatic and environmental change. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/095968369700700314
The paper
Cook, E. R., & Peters, K. (1997). Calculating unbiased tree-ring indices for the study of climatic and environmental change. The Holocene. https://doi.org/10.1177/095968369700700314

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.